The Effects of Movement and Intravehicular Versus Intervehicular Communication on C2V Crew Performance: Limited User Test Phase III

Abstract

The procedure and results of the group performance component of the command and control vehicle (C 2 V) Limited User Test (LUT) Phase III are described in this report. The test was conducted to examine (a) the effects of movement on the ability of crews to work effectively as a team, (b) terrain impacts on team performance tasks, and (c) the effect of distributed team operations. Sixteen National Guardsmen, divided into four-person teams, served as participants. The evaluation design was similar to a 2 (Movement: Stationary, Moving) x 2 (Terrain: Paved, Course A) x 2 (Communication: Intravehicle, Intervehicle) with the baseline occupying the position of the nonfitting control arrangement. The effects of movement on team performance were evaluated by conducting some trials while the C 2 V was stationary and other trials while it was moving. The influence of terrain on team performance was studied by conducting some trials on Course A of the Perryman test course and the remaining trials on a paved 3-mile course. In the intravehicular communication condition, the four members of a team were housed in the same C 2 V and worked together on the same task. Teammates had visual contact and communicated verbally via intercom. Two teammates were in each C 2 V for the intervehicular manipulation. It was concluded that the C 2 V environment impaired all group performance tasks, especially those that appeared to demand a great degree of coordination and integration. Team performance was below the baseline when crews were housed in the C 2 V, regardless of whether the vehicle was stationary or moving, although movement increased the deleterious impact of the C 2 V on group performance. The impact of terrain on performance was inconclusive, possibly because of the small sample size and the limited number of situational conditions examined. If the C 2 V is to become a prominent part of the 21st century Army's arsenal, then additional experimentation must be conducted to assess implications for team performance during a variety of conditions using validated task procedures. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Effects of the Command and Control Vehicle (C2V) Operational Environment on Soldier Health and Performance

“…This finding is consistent with the results from an earlier study of the C2V (Beck & Pierce, 1996) in which performance deteriorated 10% in stationary conditions and 18% during move conditions, relative to performance in a controlled environment outside the vehicle. In the present study, performance deterioration observed during park could be the consequence of classically conditioned motion sickness symptoms or a deterioration in motivation and concentration because of distraction created by anticipation of the adverse effects of impending field tests.…”

“…It was concluded that conflicting sensory information from the subject's visual displays and movements of the vehicle during the field exercise significantly contributed to motion sickness symptoms observed. The results are consistent with earlier studies conducted at Camp Roberts National Guard Training Center, California, by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) (Tauson, Doss, Rice, Tyrol, & Davidson, 1995) and at Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), Maryland (Beck & Pierce, 1996).…”

Perceived Motion Sickness and Effects on Shooting Performance Following Combat Vehicle Transportation

“…Previous studies regarding effects from transportation on performance, in general, show that the cause of impaired performance can be difficult to identify (Beck & Pierce, 1998) and therefore needs to be detected by using psycho-physiological measurements (Cowings, Suter, Toscano, Kamiya, & Naifeh, 1986) combined with subjective ratings. Because participants exposed to motion vary in susceptibility to motion sickness, it is important to gain in-depth knowledge regarding the initial physiological processes that cause motion sickness.…”

Development of a team performance task battery to evaluate performance of the command and control vehicle (C2V) crew

“…Tasks. It was concluded that the C2V environment impaired performance of all group performance tasks, especially those that required a great degree of coordination and integration (Beck & Pierce, 1998).…”